Pith. sign in

REVIEW

On the modification and revocation of open source licences

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2407.13064 v1 pith:QZSYJ72Q submitted 2024-05-29 cs.DL cs.CY

classification cs.DLcs.CY
keywords opensourcecontributorsauthorsdownstreamlicensesrecentusers
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Historically, open source commitments have been deemed irrevocable once materials are released under open source licenses. In this paper, the authors argue for the creation of a subset of rights that allows open source contributors to force users to (i) update to the most recent version of a model, (ii) accept new use case restrictions, or even (iii) cease using the software entirely. While this would be a departure from the traditional open source approach, the legal, reputational and moral risks related to open-sourcing AI models could justify contributors having more control over downstream uses. Recent legislative changes have also opened the door to liability of open source contributors in certain cases. The authors believe that contributors would welcome the ability to ensure that downstream users are implementing updates that address issues like bias, guardrail workarounds or adversarial attacks on their contributions. Finally, this paper addresses how this license category would interplay with RAIL licenses, and how it should be operationalized and adopted by key stakeholders such as OSS platforms and scanning tools.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools